[Federal Register: September 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 186)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 54719-54773]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26se07-27]
[[Page 54719]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Federal Communications Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
47 CFR Part 73
Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing
Broadcast Service; Proposed Rule and Final Rule
[[Page 54720]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 87-268; FCC 07-138]
Advanced Television Systems and Their Impact Upon the Existing
Television Broadcast Service
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission adopts a new Table of Allotments for digital
television (DTV) providing all eligible stations with channels for DTV
operations after the DTV transition on February 17, 2009. The new DTV
Table accommodates all eligible broadcasters, reflects to the extent
possible the channel elections made by broadcasters, and is consistent
with efficient spectrum use. The new DTV Table finalizes the channels
and facilities necessary to complete the digital transition and
ultimately will replace the existing DTV Table at the end of the DTV
transition. The existing DTV Table continues to govern stations' DTV
operations until the end of the DTV transition.
DATES: Effective October 26, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this
proceeding, contact Kim Matthews of the Media Bureau, Policy Division,
(202) 418-2154.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Federal
Communications Commission's Seventh Report and Order in MB Docket No.
87-268, FCC 07-138, adopted August 1, 2007, and released August 6,
2007. The full text of this document is available for public inspection
and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center,
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257,
Washington, DC 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS
(http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available
electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) The complete
text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. To request this
document in accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio
recording, and Braille), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the
Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530
(voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
Summary of the Seventh Report and Order
1. In this Seventh Report and Order, the Commission adopts a new
Table of Allotments for digital television (``DTV'') providing all
eligible stations with channels for DTV operations after the DTV
transition on February 17, 2009. The new DTV Table is the result of
informed decisions made by eligible licensees and permittees during the
Commission's channel election process. As the Commission stated in the
Seventh Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in this proceeding (71
FR 66592, November 15, 2006) (``Seventh Further Notice''), in
developing these final DTV allotments the Commission has attempted to
accommodate broadcasters' channel preferences as well as their
replication and maximization service area certifications (made via FCC
Form 381). The DTV Table adopted herein reflects consideration of the
comments filed in response to the Seventh Further Notice as well as our
efforts to promote overall spectrum efficiency and ensure that
broadcasters provide the best possible service to the public.
2. In early 2006, Congress established February 17, 2009 as a new
hard deadline for the end of the DTV transition and the end of analog
transmissions by full power television broadcasters. In view of the
short period of time remaining before this deadline, our goal has been
to finalize DTV channels and facilities as expeditiously as possible to
provide stations with the certainty they need to complete their digital
build out, consistent with the interference and other standards set
forth in the Seventh Further Notice.
Requests for Minor Adjustments
3. We will make a variety of minor adjustments based on requests
from commenters. We received comments filed on behalf of 22 stations
requesting that we make minor adjustments to the station coordinates
specified in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. We asked licensees to
review the accuracy of their information contained in the proposed DTV
Table Appendix B and comment on any inaccuracies or discrepancies in
this information. In some cases, the station requested a change to
conform to the coordinates reflected on a station authorization and/or
the coordinates of the Antenna Structure Registration (``ASR'') for the
station's tower. In circumstances where a station submitted a
correction to the station's coordinates, the corrected coordinates are
specified on a station license or construction permit, and the
requested change did not result in a change of more than three seconds
latitude or longitude for the station, we are making the requested
correction. Accepting corrections to Appendix B of three seconds or
less is consistent with the Commission's rules, which do not require a
construction permit for such a correction before it can be licensed.
Three seconds of latitude or longitude is approximately 200 to 300
feet. The stations for which we make such a correction are listed in
Appendix D1 hereto and the changes requested by those stations are
reflected in DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein.
4. We also received comments filed on behalf of stations requesting
modification of the proposed DTV Table Appendix B in the Seventh
Further Notice either to express a station's geographic coordinates in
tenths of seconds in addition to the currently listed degrees, minutes,
and seconds or to round to the nearest whole second rather than merely
truncate the data. One such commenter argued that precision is
important as even a small change in location data could have an impact
on interference studies in light of the 0.1 percent interference
standard. We note that a tenth of a second latitude or longitude is
equivalent to approximately 10 feet.
5. We find it is appropriate to round to the nearest whole second
because the resources necessary to collect more precise data and revise
the computer software that generates the Table would not be justified
by the small difference in physical location. For those commenters that
have requested a correction of their station coordinates and provided
us with station coordinates expressed to the tenth of a second, we have
revised DTV Table Appendix B to round the coordinates to the nearest
whole second. The stations for which such a change is made are included
in the list of stations in Appendix D1 herein.
Requests To Make Changes to Certification
6. We are permitting changes to stations' facility certifications
(FCC Form 381) based on appropriate demonstrations from these stations
where such changes are consistent with the circumstances contemplated
in the Seventh Further Notice. In paragraph 28 of the Seventh Further
Notice, the Commission recognized that some stations have already
constructed or received authorization to construct facilities on the
station's TCD that provide service to areas that extend
[[Page 54721]]
beyond that to which the station certified on FCC Form 381. Because the
interference protection provided during the channel election process
was limited to the facilities to which the station certified in FCC
Form 381, the Commission noted that stations serving or authorized to
serve areas beyond their certified area could become subject to
interference in those areas. The Commission stated that it would permit
stations in this situation to file comments proposing to modify their
certified facilities to match their authorized or constructed
facilities. Stations requesting such a change were required either to
(1) Submit an engineering analysis demonstrating that the proposed
change to their certified facilities would not result in interference
in excess of 0.1 percent to any licensee's existing TCD or (2) submit
the signed, written consent of every affected licensee. The Commission
also stated that stations in these circumstances seeking a change in
their certification would be required to accept interference from any
channel election already approved.
1. Requests That Meet the Interference Criteria
7. We will permit stations to change their facility certifications
(FCC Form 381), and thus our post-transition DTV Table Appendix B,
where such stations have demonstrated that such modification of their
facilities will conform to licensed or authorized facilities and where
the proposed change to the Appendix B facilities either meets the
interference criterion discussed above (i.e., the proposed change would
not result in interference in excess of 0.1 percent to any licensee's
existing TCD) or, as discussed further below, the station affected
agreed to accept the interference. We received comments on behalf of
130 stations requesting such changes. We have made the changes
requested by these commenters and the changes are reflected in the
revised DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein. A list of the stations for
which we made these changes is attached hereto in Appendix D2. To
address the requests of those commenters in this group whose stations
are moving to a different channel for post-transition service, we
recalculated their post-transition DTV coverage area based on their
authorized or licensed DTV facility, as indicated by the file number
shown in Appendix D2.
8. In some cases, stations listed in Appendix D2 request changes to
the DTV Table/Appendix B that differ from the facilities specified in a
current authorization for the station on the post-transition channel.
In these circumstances, we have revised DTV Table Appendix B to specify
the station's authorized facilities. The following paragraphs describe
three situations that merit additional explanation.
9. KBCW, San Francisco, CA. San Francisco Television Station KBCW,
Inc. (``KBCW''), licensee of station KBCW, channel 44, and KBCW-DT,
channel 45, San Francisco, CA, received channel 45 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table. In comments filed on behalf of KBCW, CBS
Corporation (``CBS'') requests a change to conform to the parameters of
KBCW's licensed facilities on Channel 45. CBS states that, along most
azimuths, the currently licensed digital facilities of KBCW exceed
those resulting from the replication facilities assigned to the station
in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. CBS states that an interference
study shows that the requested KBCW parameters would cause in excess of
0.1 percent new interference only to the digital operation of KQCA,
Stockton, California. According to CBS, KQCA currently receives 0.46
percent interference from KBCW-DT's presently licensed operation and
would continue to do so after the transition if KBCW-DT keeps its
existing facilities. CBS submitted an agreement in which KQCA agrees to
accept this interference. In light of the interference agreement
submitted by CBS, we will accept the requested change to the parameters
for KBCW to conform to its authorized and operating facilities. These
changes are reflected in the revised DTV Table Appendix B adopted
herein.
10. KALO, Honolulu, HI. Pacifica Broadcasting Company
(``Pacifica''), licensee of station KALO(TV), channel 38, and KALO-DT,
channel *10, Honolulu, HI, received channel 10 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table. In a late-filed comment, Pacifica noted its concern
that it may not be able to operate at its applied-for power level on
channel 10 because it will cause an unacceptable level of interference
to the FCC monitoring station at Waipahu. To address this anticipated
difficulty, Pacifica has proposed a reduced ERP of 14.275 kW. This
power level is less than the authorized power of the facility, but the
reduction is necessary to prevent interference with our nearby
monitoring facility. We have studied the proposed power and find that
it does not cause impermissible interference to any station. We accept
KALO's proposal and the DTV Table Appendix B has been revised
accordingly.
11. WPPB, Boca Raton, FL. The School Board of Broward County
(``SBBC''), licensee of WPPB-TV, channel *63, and permittee of WPPB-DT,
channel *40, Boca Raton, FL, received channel *40 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table. In comments filed to this proceeding, SBBC supports
the proposed allotment of channel *40, but asks to change its certified
facilities and DTV Table Appendix B to reflect facilities authorized by
the Commission in 2002. No other comments were filed related to this
TCD.
12. SBBC's request to change WPPB's DTV channel from *44 to *40 was
approved in the 2002 Boca Raton Allotment Order. In that order, WPPB-
DT, channel *40, was authorized to operate at maximized facilities,
including an ERP of 1000 kW and an antenna HAAT of 310 m. However, SBBC
certified in its FCC Form 381 for maximized facilities as authorized by
its existing construction permit for DTV channel *44. SBBC explained in
its FCC Form 381 that it did this because the channel substitution
decision was challenged by a petition for reconsideration and, thus,
not deemed ``final.'' In its FCC Form 381, SBBC also stated its
intention to certify for maximized facilities at the new channel *40
allotment when the channel substitution became final. SBBC subsequently
filed an application in 2006 to conform its new DTV channel *40
allotment to those facilities specified in the 2002 Boca Raton
Allotment Order.
13. The proposed post-transition DTV Table now shows WPPB's new DTV
channel *40. We hereby revise DTV Table Appendix B herein to reflect
the facilities authorized by the 2002 Boca Raton Allotment Order. This
change does not result in more than 0.1 percent new interference to any
station. WPPB's requested certification change is to facilities
expressly authorized to the station in 2002, and the station expressed
its intent to certify to these facilities in its Form 381 filing.
2. Requests By Operating Stations That Do Not Meet Interference
Criteria
14. We will permit stations that are already operating their final,
post-transition DTV facilities to change their facility certifications
(FCC Form 381), and thus our post-transition DTV Table Appendix B, to
reflect those facilities, even though such operations will exceed the
0.1 percent interference standard. Eight stations requested changes to
the proposed DTV Table Appendix B to reflect operating facilities where
we have determined that the interference caused to the TCD of another
licensee exceeds the 0.1 percent interference standard and there
[[Page 54722]]
is no interference agreement with the affected station(s). In several
cases, the Commission granted pending applications for these stations
after certification. In other cases, as discussed further below, we
have permitted stations to change their certification from replication
to maximization, thereby potentially causing more interference to other
stations than would have been permitted for the facilities to which the
station originally certified.
15. While these stations are requesting changes to the parameters
proposed in the Seventh Further Notice in situations where the level of
interference exceeds the relevant standard, we find that they have met
their burden of demonstrating that their special circumstances justify
a waiver. We therefore grant the requested changes. In each case, the
changes are being requested for stations that are already operating
their final, post-transition DTV facilities. We believe it is
unnecessary and unfair to require these already-operational facilities
to reduce service. Indeed, as these stations are already providing
service at the requested parameters, it is in the public interest to
allow them to continue to do so. In addition, none of the stations
receiving the interference filed an opposition to the station
requesting the change.
16. Following is a brief discussion of the stations requesting
changes to reflect their operating facilities and the relevant
circumstances that support our grant of their requests:
17. KTBN, Santa Ana, CA. Trinity Christian Center of Santa Ana,
Inc. (``Trinity''), licensee of station KTBN-TV, channel 40, and KTBN-
DT, channel 23, Santa Ana, CA, received channel 23 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table. Trinity requests that the parameters for KTBN in
the proposed DTV Table Appendix B be changed to reflect those of the
facility currently licensed in BLCDT-20050729AFT. The Commission's
interference analysis shows that KTBN's licensed facility causes 0.75
percent interference to KBEH, Oxnard, California (analog channel 63,
digital channel 24 for both pre- and post-transition).
18. WICS, Springfield, IL. WICS Licensee, LLC (``WICS Licensee''),
licensee of station WICS, channel 20, and WICS-DT, channel 42,
Springfield, IL, received channel 42 for its TCD in the proposed DTV
Table. Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (``Sinclair''), the parent
company of WICS Licensee, requests that the parameters for WICS in the
DTV Table Appendix B be changed to reflect those of the licensed
facility BLCDT-20050627AAI. The Commission's interference analysis
shows that the WICS licensed facility causes 0.43 percent interference
to WICD, Champaign, Illinois (analog 15, post-transition digital
channel 41).
19. WUTV, Buffalo, NY. WUTV Licensee, LLC (``WUTV Licensee''),
licensee of station WUTV, channel 29, and permittee of WUTV-DT, channel
14, Buffalo, NY, received channel 14 for its TCD in the proposed DTV
Table. Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc., parent company of WUTV Licensee,
requests that the parameters for WUTV in the DTV Table Appendix B be
changed to reflect those of the licensed facility BLCDT-20060829BGK.
The Commission's interference analysis shows that the WUTV licensed
facility causes 8.45 percent interference to the TCD on channel 14 of a
new analog singleton in Bath, New York (call sign 870331LW). We note
that, in its license application, WUTV indicated it would employ
antenna beam tilting to protect the Bath station from interference and
that the WUTV license specifies beam tilting.
20. WKDH, Houston, MS. Southern Broadcasting Inc. (``Southern''),
licensee of singleton station WKDH, channel 45, Houston, MS, received
channel 45 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Southern requests
that the parameters for WKDH in the DTV Table Appendix B be changed to
reflect the parameters specified in its construction permit BPCDT-
20060519ABE. WKDH is now operating pursuant to program test authority.
The Commission's interference analysis shows that WKDH causes 0.34
percent interference to WPXH, Gadsden, Alabama (analog channel 44,
digital channel 45 for both pre- and post-transition).
21. WTEN, Albany, NY. Young Broadcasting, Inc. (``Young''),
licensee of station WTEN, channel 10, and WTEN-DT, channel 26, Albany,
NY, received channel 26 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Young
requests that the parameters for WTEN in the DTV Table Appendix B be
changed to reflect the parameters of the station's license BLCDT-
20060104ACC. The Commission's interference analysis shows that the WTEN
licensed facility causes 3.24 percent interference to WHPX, New London,
Connecticut (analog channel 26, post-transition digital channel 26) and
1.39 percent interference to WFXV, Utica, New York, (analog channel 33,
digital channel 27 for both pre- and post-transition).
22. WLMB, Toledo, OH. Dominion Broadcasting, Inc., (``Dominion''),
licensee of station WLMB, channel 40, and WLMB-DT, channel 5, Toledo,
OH, received channel 5 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Dominion
requests that the parameters for WLMB in the DTV Table Appendix B be
changed to reflect those of the licensed facility BLCDT-20050201AAF.
Dominion failed to timely file a certification on FCC Form 381 for WLMB
specifying whether it would construct replication or maximization
facilities, and consequently WLMB was assigned replication facilities
in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. The Commission noted that forty-
one stations, including WLMB, did not timely file a certification form,
and stated that it would permit these licensees to file comments
proposing a change to their certification to specify maximized
facilities for which they would have been allowed to certify. Dominion
requests that its certification for WLMB be modified to specify the
maximized facilities that Dominion has now constructed and that the
Commission has licensed. The Commission's interference analysis shows
that the WLMB licensed facility causes 2.04 percent interference to
WGVK, Kalamazoo, Michigan (analog channel 52, digital channel 5 for
both pre- and post-transition).
23. KOCE, Huntington Beach, CA. KOCE-TV Foundation (``KOCE
Foundation''), licensee of noncommercial educational station KOCE,
channel *50-, and KOCE-DT, channel *48, Huntington Beach, CA, received
channel *48 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. KOCE Foundation
requests that the parameters for KOCE in the proposed DTV Table
Appendix B be changed to reflect those of the licensed facility BLEDT-
20041117ADG. KOCE Foundation failed to timely file a certification on
FCC Form 381 for KOCE specifying whether it would construct replication
or maximization facilities, and consequently KOCE was assigned
replication facilities in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. This
situation is similar to WLMB, paragraph 54, supra. The Commission noted
that KOCE also did not timely file a certification form and stated that
it would permit this licensee to file comments proposing a change to
its certification to specify maximized facilities for which it would
have been allowed to certify. KOCE Foundation requests that its
certification for KOCE be modified to specify KOCE-DT's licensed,
maximized facilities. The Commission's interference analysis shows that
the KOCE licensed facility causes 0.24 percent new interference to
KAZA, Avalon, CA (analog channel 54, digital channel 47 for both pre-
and post-transition).
[[Page 54723]]
24. WLLA, Kalamazoo, MI. Christian Faith Broadcast, Inc.
(``Christian Faith''), licensee of station WLLA, channel 64, and WLLA-
DT, channel 45, Kalamazoo, MI, received channel 45 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table. Christian Faith failed to timely file a
certification on FCC Form 381 for this station. Stations that did not
file certifications were assigned replication facilities for purposes
of the Commission's channel election process and interference
evaluation. On October 31, 2005, Christian Faith filed a request for
acceptance of a late-filed certification on behalf of WLLA specifying
maximization facilities authorized for that station. The proposed DTV
Table Appendix B did not reflect this requested certification change.
Christian Faith subsequently filed comments in response to the Seventh
Further Notice requesting a change in the proposed DTV Table to reflect
its construction permit for maximized facilities for this station. On
May 29, 2007, Christian Faith filed a license application for WLLA for
these maximized facilities. The authorized and operating maximized
facilities of WLLA cause 2.11 percent new interference to WZPX, Battle
Creek, Michigan (analog channel 43, digital channel 44 for both pre-
and post-transition) and 0.79 percent new interference to WDIV,
Detroit, Michigan (analog channel 4, digital channel 45 for both pre-
and post-transition).
25. For the reasons discussed supra, we hereby grant the changes
requested for these eight stations and these changes are reflected in
the DTV Table Appendix B adopted herein.
3. Requests By Non-Operational Stations That Do Not Meet Interference
Criteria
26. Comments were filed on behalf of two stations requesting
changes to the proposed DTV Table Appendix B to reflect authorized
facilities where we have determined that the interference caused to
another licensee's existing TCD exceeds the 0.1 percent interference
standard, there is no interference agreement with the affected
station(s), and the station requesting the change is not operational.
One of these stations, WTCV, San Juan, PR, has not met its burden to
demonstrate that special circumstances justify a waiver, and we
therefore deny its request to change DTV Table Appendix B. Unlike the
stations discussed above, this station has not completed construction
and begun DTV service to the public. We do not believe it is
appropriate to change the facilities specified in DTV Table Appendix B
where the station requesting the change does not meet the applicable
interference standard and is not yet providing service to the public.
We note that this station could apply in the future for a modification
to specify maximized facilities. Any such application would be subject
to interference criteria and other standards adopted in the Third DTV
Periodic Review Report and Order. As discussed further below, for one
station, WMFD, Mansfield, Ohio, we will grant the request to change DTV
Table Appendix B because this station has obtained international
coordination for its authorized facility.
27. WTCV, San Juan, PR. International Broadcasting Corporation
(``IBC''), licensee of station WTCV, channel 18, and WTCV-DT, channel
32, San Juan, PR, received channel 32 for its TCD in the proposed DTV
Table. IBC states in its comments that it originally intended to
operate its post-transition DTV transmitter from its current analog
tower but was forced to change sites because of difficulties in
obtaining tower space at its original site for its digital facilities.
According to IBC, after lengthy negotiations with the tower site owner,
Puerto Rico Telephone Company, ``it became clear that the tower
structural requirements imposed at the time made the project
economically unfeasible.'' IBC therefore certified to an authorized
construction permit for a different site with substantially reduced
facilities. In its comments IBC states that it has recently solved the
difficulties of obtaining tower space to operate from its currently
authorized analog site and has filed an application for a construction
permit to operate from this site. This application was pending at the
time IBC filed its comments in response to the Seventh Further Notice
but has now been granted. IBC requests a change in the proposed DTV
Table Appendix B to specify the parameters of the construction permit
application that was pending at the time IBC's comments were filed and
that has now been granted. IBC states that the proposed change in site
and technical facilities will enable WTCV to serve an additional
318,230 viewers. However, the WTCV facilities requested by IBC would
cause 1.49 percent new interference to WSJU-TV, San Juan, Puerto Rico
(analog channel 30, post-transition digital channel 31) and WTCV is not
currently operational. As the facilities requested by IBC would cause
new interference in excess of the 0.1 percent interference standard and
the station is not yet providing service to the public, we will deny
IBC's request to change DTV Table Appendix B.
28. WMFD, Mansfield, OH. Mid-State Television, Inc., (``Mid-
State''), licensee of station WMFD-TV, channel 68 and WMFD-DT, channel
12, Mansfield, OH, received channel 12 for its TCD in the proposed DTV
Table. Mid-State certified to a then-pending maximization application
that had not yet been authorized due to international coordination
issues. Mid-State states that, when it filed its pre-election
certification, it indicated that it intended to operate with the
facilities specified in the then-pending modification application, but
that the application remained subject to international coordination.
After certification, the application was amended to resolve the
international coordination issues and subsequently was granted in July
2005. The proposed DTV Table Appendix B specifies the facilities to
which Mid-State certified. Mid-State requests that DTV Table Appendix B
be changed to reflect the facilities specified in its July 2005
construction permit. The facilities requested by Mid-State would cause
1.13 percent interference to WINM, Angola, Indiana (analog channel 63,
post-transition digital channel 12) and 0.44 percent interference to
WBOY, Clarksburg, West Virginia (analog channel 12, post-transition
digital channel 12). Neither of the affected stations filed comments
opposing WMFD's proposed change to Appendix B.
29. We will grant Mid-State's request and change DTV Table Appendix
B accordingly. This change is reflected in the DTV Table Appendix B
attached hereto. The change requested by Mid-State is the result of a
negotiated solution with Canada to resolve international coordination
issues that prohibit operation of the facility proposed in the
application pending at the time of certification and to which Mid-State
certified on FCC Form 381. The Commission has recognized that stations
facing international coordination issues face unique challenges in
completing the digital transition. As the result of a modification to a
Canadian DTV allotment, WMFD states that it is precluded from
constructing the facilities listed in the proposed DTV Table Appendix
B. If we were to deny the change requested by Mid-State, WMFD would be
required to identify a new facility and re-commence the process of
obtaining international coordination for that facility. Because of the
unique circumstances faced by WMFD, a station that is already providing
digital service to the public
[[Page 54724]]
and seeks to improve that service, we believe that grant of the
requested change to DTV Table Appendix B is warranted and will serve
the public interest.
Requests for Modified Coverage Area
30. We will grant requests filed on behalf of 30 stations whose
post-transition DTV channel is different from their pre-transition DTV
channel to change the coverage area in the proposed DTV Table Appendix
B. In general, these commenters argue that the facilities specified in
the proposed DTV Table Appendix B do not permit the station to provide
service to the area served by the station's analog facility.
31. In the creation of the initial Table of Allotments, DTV
channels were chosen to allow service on the channel to best match the
Grade B service contour of the analog station with which it was paired.
Implementation of this replication goal requires a combination of
transmitter site, ERP, directional antenna characteristics, and antenna
height that is adequate to cover at least the same area as was served
by the analog station. In the Sixth Report and Order in this docket (62
FR 26684, May 14, 1997) (``Sixth Report and Order''), however, the
Commission determined that the maximum permissible power for all
allotments in the initial DTV Table would be 1000 kW. For some stations
whose analog channel was in the VHF band and whose initial DTV channel
was in the UHF band, an ERP of 1000 kW was not sufficient to permit
replication of the station's analog service.
32. On FCC Form 381, the Commission permitted stations the choice
of certifying to operate their post-transition DTV station based on:
(1) A current station authorization; (2) a pending application for
maximization that had not been authorized due to a pending
international coordination issue; or (3) replication facilities.
Stations certifying to replication facilities that had not changed
their DTV channel since the 1998 DTV Second MO&O (64 FR 4322, January
28, 1999) (``Second MO&O'') had their replication facilities based on
the facilities established in Appendix B of the Second MO&O.
33. Several commenters argue that, because of the 1000 kW maximum
imposed in the Sixth Report and Order, the Commission's decision to
base replication during the channel election process on the station's
initial DTV facilities established in the Second MO&O rather than the
station's analog facilities resulted in the Commission proposing
parameters in the DTV Table Appendix B that do not permit the station
to replicate the analog service area. In other cases, stations filed
comments requesting a change to the parameters in the proposed DTV
Table Appendix B to modify the station's coverage area to permit
replication of the station's analog coverage area where the station was
not subject to the 1000 kW maximum imposed in the Sixth Report and
Order. These stations, returning to their analog channel for post-
transition operations, commented that the proposed DTV Table Appendix B
facilities would not permit replication of the station's analog Grade B
contour. For stations returning to their analog channel, this
discrepancy between the proposed Appendix B parameters and the analog
coverage area may have been due to translation discrepancies that
occurred over a series of engineering calculations used to determine
replication. In other cases, stations simply requested an increase in
power or a change to the station's antenna pattern to permit the
station to serve more of the area served by the station's analog
facilities.
34. In response to the comments filed on behalf of these stations,
we have recalculated Appendix B facilities based on replicating the
analog coverage that was used to determine their initial DTV table
facilities. If the recalculation would result in a reduction in the
Appendix B facilities, we are adopting herein the larger Appendix B
facilities that we had initially proposed in the Seventh Further
Notice. If the recalculation would result in a larger coverage area and
our analysis indicates that the recalculated facilities (1) Meet the
0.1 percent interference standard specified in the Second DTV Periodic
Report and Order (69 FR 59500, October 4, 2004) (``Second DTV Periodic
Report and Order'') or (2) would cause more than 0.1 percent new
interference but the affected station(s) agree to accept the
interference, we are granting the request to change DTV Appendix B to
reflect the larger coverage area. These stations are listed in Appendix
D3 and the revised parameters for these stations are reflected in the
revised DTV Table Appendix B, infra. There were no comments filed
opposing these requested changes.
35. We believe that permitting these changes to the proposed DTV
Table is consistent with our overall goal in the DTV transition of
encouraging replication of analog service. One of the Commission's
objectives throughout the transition has been to permit broadcasters to
reach with digital service the audiences they have been serving with
analog service so that viewers will continue to have access to the
stations that they are accustomed to receiving over the air. We believe
that the revisions requested by the stations listed in Appendix D3 will
serve the public interest by permitting those stations to provide
digital service to more of their established analog viewers.
36. In addition, three stations requested changes to the proposed
DTV Table Appendix B to increase the station's coverage area, but our
recalculations of the Appendix B facilities and the subsequent
interference analysis show that the requested change would result in
interference that would exceed the 0.1 percent interference standard
adopted in the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order and the affected
station has not agreed to accept this interference. We deny the
requests of these stations, as described in greater detail below. None
of them are requesting changes to reflect DTV facilities they are
operating or are authorized to operate. Consistent with our decisions
above, we decline to change the facilities specified in DTV Table
Appendix B where the station requesting the change does not meet the
applicable interference standard and is not yet providing service to
the public. We note, however, that each of these stations must file an
application for authority to construct its post-transition facility,
and at that time may be able, consistent with the procedures ultimately
adopted in the Third Periodic Review proceeding, to specify facilities
in that application that more closely approach the parameters requested
in their comments. Following is a list of these stations and a
description of their individual circumstances.
37. WEDU, Tampa, FL. Florida West Coast Public Broadcasting, Inc.
(``FWCPB''), licensee of NCE station WEDU, channel *3, and WEDU-DT,
channel *54, Tampa, FL, received channel *13 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table. FWCPB requests that the proposed DTV Table Appendix
B be revised to specify omnidirectional facilities for WEDU at an ERP
of 40 kW. The Commission's interference analysis based on recalculated
Appendix B facilities shows that WEDU would cause 1.16 percent new
interference to WTLV, Jacksonville, Florida (analog channel 12, post-
transition digital channel TCD channel 13).
38. WGTV, Athens, GA. Georgia Public Telecommunications Commission
(``GPTC''), licensee of NCE station WGTV, channel *8, and permittee of
WGTV-DT, channel *12, Athens, GA, received channel *8 for its TCD in
the proposed DTV Table. GPTC
[[Page 54725]]
requests that the proposed parameters in DTV Table Appendix B be
changed to permit WGTV to increase power and operate with an
omnidirectional antenna. The Commission's interference analysis based
on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows that WGTV would cause 0.19
percent new interference to WCIQ, Mount Cheaha, Alabama (analog channel
7, post-transition digital channel 7).
39. KOED, Tulsa, OK. Oklahoma Educational Television Authority
(``OETA''), licensee of NCE station KOED-TV, channel *11, and KOED-DT,
channel *38, Tulsa, OK, received channel *11 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table. OETA requests that DTV Table Appendix B be revised
to reflect an increase in antenna height for KOED. The Commission's
interference analysis based on recalculated Appendix B facilities shows
that the KOED would cause 0.16 percent new interference to KTUL, Tulsa,
Oklahoma (analog channel 8, post-transition digital channel 10).
Requests for Alternative Channel Assignments
40. We will grant certain stations' requests for an alternative
channel assignment, consistent with our proposal in the Seventh Further
Notice. In paragraph 25 of the Seventh Further Notice, the Commission
stated that it would consider requests for alternative channel
assignments only from the following: (1) Licensees unable to construct
full, authorized DTV facilities on the TCDs that they requested and
received because, in order to avoid causing impermissible interference
to other TCDs and still obtain their preferred channel, they had to
agree to construct facilities on their TCD that are smaller than those
to which they had certified on FCC Form 381; (2) licensees with
international coordination issues which the Commission has been unable
to resolve with the Canadian and Mexican governments; (3) licensees
with TCDs for low-VHF channels (channels 2-6); and (4) new licensees
and permittees that attained such status after the start of the channel
election process and to which we assigned a TCD for post-transition DTV
operations because their assigned NTSC or DTV channel was determined to
cause impermissible interference to existing licensees. The Commission
stated that licensees that want to change their DTV allotment, but
which are not in any of these categories (e.g., are technically able to
construct their full, authorized DTV facilities on their existing TCD)
may request a change in allotment only after the DTV Table is finalized
and must do so through the existing allotment procedures.
41. The Commission stated that any request for an alternative
channel assignment must either meet the 0.1 percent additional
interference standard or be accompanied by a request for a waiver of
the 0.1 percent limit or the signed written consent of the affected
licensee. The Commission stated that it would grant waivers of the 0.1
percent limit where doing so would promote overall spectrum efficiency
and ensure the best possible service to the public, including service
to local communities.
42. We received comments filed on behalf of 22 stations requesting
a change in the channel assigned to the station for post-transition
operation in the proposed DTV Table. For 13 of these stations, we will
grant the requested channel change. A list of the stations for which we
are granting an alternative channel appears in Appendix D5, infra, and
we have revised the DTV Table for these stations accordingly. For each
of these stations, we believe that the circumstances described by the
station are consistent with one or more of the criteria for
consideration of alternative channel assignments outlined in the
Seventh Further Notice. Furthermore, none require waiver of the 0.1
percent interference standard, because they either do not exceed that
limit or have acquired the agreement of the affected station(s).
43. For two stations, we deny the request for an alternative
channel assignment. According to the Commission's interference
analysis, the new channels requested by these stations cause
interference to another station in excess of the 0.1 percent standard
and there is no agreement with the affected station accepting this
interference. As discussed below, we decline to waive our interference
limit for these stations. Following is a brief discussion of these two
stations and the relevant circumstances.
44. KCWX, Fredericksburg, TX. Corridor Television LLP, Inc.,
(``Corridor''), licensee of singleton station KCWX, channel 2,
Fredericksburg, TX, received channel 5 for its TCD in the proposed DTV
Table. Corridor requests the substitution of channel 8 for its TCD of
channel 5. Corridor recognizes that the allotment of channel 8 to KCWX
would require a waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard, but
argues that grant of a waiver would contribute to clearing the lower
VHF band so that it can be used for other purposes. In addition,
Corridor states that it serves viewers in a rural area that rely more
heavily on overthe-air signals and that channel 8 would result in fewer
signal reception difficulties for these viewers than channel 5.
Corridor also argues that operation on channel 8 would reduce its
operating costs.
45. Corridor argues that, with respect to new channel allotments
after the transition, the Commission proposed to utilize an
interference protection requirement based on engineering criteria
(e.g., permissible interference), rather than geographic spacing, and
to use an interference standard of 0.5 percent. Corridor argues that
this proposed standard should be given significant weight in
considering requests to waive the 0.1 percent standard in connection
with the TCD selection process. The Commission's interference analysis
shows that the requested change would cause 0.79 percent interference
to KTBC, Austin, Texas (analog channel 7, post-transition digital
channel 7) and 0.47 percent interference to NCE station KLRN, San
Antonio, Texas (analog channel 9, post-transition digital channel 9).
KTBC License, Inc., licensee of KTBC, filed an opposition to Corridor's
request to waive the 0.1 percent interference limit. In addition, Alamo
Public Telecommunications Council, licensee of KLRN, filed an
opposition to Corridor's request, also arguing that Corridor should not
receive a waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard.
46. We note that the 0.5 percent standard is only a proposal and a
different standard could be adopted. Moreover, the new interference
caused to KTBC, 0.79 percent, not only significantly exceeds the
current 0.1 percent interference standard applied to channel
substitution requests, it also exceeds even the proposed 0.5 percent
standard. In view of the significant level of impermissible
interference caused by the proposed KCWX channel substitution, we
decline to waive our interference limit in this situation. We do not
believe that a waiver in these circumstances would promote overall
spectrum efficiency or ensure the best possible television service to
the public or the local community.
47. WMYT, Rock Hill, SC. WMYT-TV, Inc., (``WMYT''), licensee of
station WMYT-TV, channel 55, and permittee of WMYT-DT, channel 39, Rock
Hill, SC, received channel 39 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table.
WMYT requests the substitution of Channel 46 for its TCD of Channel 39.
WMYT argues that Channel 46 is fully spaced to other stations, while
Channel 39 is short-spaced to two stations. WMYT also argues that the
station would cause less interference on Channel 46 at its preferred
ERP than it does at the lower
[[Page 54726]]
assigned ERP on Channel 39. In addition, WMYT states that operation on
Channel 46 would permit it to serve up to 500,000 additional viewers.
The Commission's interference analysis shows that the requested change
would cause 0.64 percent new interference to WYCW, Asheville, NC
(analog 62, post-transition digital channel 45).
48. In view of the level of interference caused to WYCW, we do not
believe it is appropriate to waive our interference standard in this
situation. The level of interference caused is far in excess of the
applicable 0.1 percent standard. In addition, the new interference
caused to WYCW of 0.64 percent exceeds even the 0.5 percent new
interference standard we proposed apply to new channel allotments after
the transition. As we concluded with respect to the proposed channel
substitution of KCWX, supra, in view of the significant level of
impermissible interference that would be caused by the WMYT request we
do not believe that a waiver of our interference standard would promote
our overall spectrum efficiency or ensure the best service to the
public.
Additional Requests to Change Appendix B Facilities
Antenna Information
49. We deny the requests of certain stations seeking to add antenna
identification numbers to the proposed post-transition DTV Table
Appendix B. Several stations requested that we change the proposed DTV
Table Appendix B to include such antenna identification numbers. In
developing the proposed post-transition DTV Table Appendix B, we did
not include any antenna identification number for stations operating
with an omnidirectional antenna. An omnidirectional antenna provides
the same power level in every azimuthal direction and antenna
identification numbers are only used for directional antennas in order
to determine the different power levels in each direction. Accordingly,
where stations request the addition of an antenna identification number
to Appendix B, we will not make that change if our database indicates
that the station is authorized for an omnidirectional antenna.
50. In addition, Scripps Howard Broadcasting requests that we
change Appendix B for KNXV, Phoenix, Arizona and WCPO, Cincinnati, Ohio
to reflect an antenna pattern value of ``1'' for 110 degrees. Trinity
Broadcasting of Indiana, Inc. makes a similar request for WCLJ,
Bloomington, Indiana. The channel allotments for KNXV and WCLJ are
based on the use of omnidirectional antennas, so we will delete the
antenna identification number in Appendix B for these stations. For
WCPO, the correct 110 degree value of 1 was used when we generated
Appendix B and we will correct the antenna pattern in the FCC's CDBS
database. Finally, Griffin Tulsa II Licensing, LLC requests that we
change Appendix B for KQCW, Muskogee, OK to reflect a relative field
value of ``0.958'' instead of ``0.096'' in the reference pattern at 280
degrees. We have made this change and it is reflected on Appendix B,
infra.
Speculative Requests To Change Appendix B Facilities
51. We reject the premature or incomplete requests of certain
stations seeking changes to their facilities as proposed in the post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B when these changes pertain to
speculative future events or could best be accomplished through the
upcoming application process. These requests are not for modifications
of the coverage area as defined by the proposed DTV Table Appendix B to
match authorized or licensed coverage. Instead, these stations comment
that they may be unable to serve the coverage area, which is described
in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B, on their post-transition channel
due to differences in station parameters on the new channel or
different equipment the station would like to use. These are changes
that should be requested in an application to construct or modify post-
transition facilities on the new channel filed consistent with the
procedures and standards for such applications adopted in the Third DTV
Periodic Review proceeding, including compliance with the filing freeze
and interference standard.
52. Commenters notified the Commission of possible future changes
to the parameters for 13 stations. See Comments of Pappas Entities,
filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 4-5 (relating to station KSWT-DT, Yuma, AZ) and
at 6 (relating to station KDBC-DT, El Paso, TX); Comments of Mission
Broadcasting Inc. (``Mission''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 6-7 (relating
to station KJTL-DT, Wichita Falls, TX) and at 10 (relating to WFXP-DT,
Erie, PA); See Comments of Twin Cities, at 3 (relating to NCE station
KTCI-DT, St. Paul, MN); Comments of The Arizona Board of Regents
(``Arizona Board''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 1 (relating to NCE station
KAET-DT, Phoenix, AZ); Comments of Barrington Peoria License LLC
(``Barrington Peoria''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 1 (relating to NCE
station WHOI-DT, Peoria, IL); Comments of the Board of Trustees of
Northern Michigan University (``Northern Michigan''), filed Jan. 10,
2007, at 2 (relating to NCE station WNMU-DT, Marquette, MI); Comments
of Puerto Rico Public Broadcasting Corporation, filed Jan. 25, 2007
(relating to station WIPR-DT, San Juan, PR); Comments of PTCB at 1
(relating to station KPCB-DT, Snyder, TX, whose proposed post-
transition DTV Appendix B facilities accurately reflect the coverage of
the KPCB certified construction permit); Comments of CBS Corporation
(``CBS''), filed Jan. 25, 2007, at 4 (relating to station KCBS-DT, Los
Angeles, CA); and Comments of Tribune Broadcasting Company
(``Tribune''), filed Jan. 29, 2007, at 5 (relating to stations WGNO-DT
and WNOL-DT, New Orleans, LA). In general, these commenters anticipate
filing requests for changes to station parameters in the future, but do
not yet have all of the information necessary to request changes at
this time. See, e.g., Comments of Pappas Entities at 4-5 (stating
intent to duplicate its analog facilities for KSWT-DT) and at 6
(speculating possible need for new site for KDBC-DT); Comments of
Mission at 6-7 and at 10 (stating future intent to modify KJTL-DT and
WFXP-DT); and Comments of Tribune at 3 (stating intent to apply for
different facilities not yet determined for WGNO-DT and WNOL-DT, both
of which were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina). On July 23, 2007,
Tribune filed an ex parte specifying the new parameters for these
stations. See Tribune ex parte (dated July 23, 2007). In addition, in
cases where a station certified to replication facilities or will not
use its current DTV channel for post-transition operations, some
stations comment that they may not be able to construct the precise
facilities specified in the proposed DTV Table Appendix B. For example,
Pappas Entities, which certified to replication facilities for KSWT-DT,
argues in its comments that it is virtually impossible for a VHF
directional antenna to duplicate exactly the directional pattern
originally designed for a UHF antenna. This issue was addressed in the
Third DTV Periodic Review NPRM (72 FR 37310, July 9, 2007) (``Third DTV
Periodic Review NPRM'') at ]] 92-93 (proposing post-transition
application rules and procedures). In general, these stations note
that, while the station seeks to serve the same coverage area on the
post-transition channel as defined by the facilities specified in
Appendix B, the station will operate with different equipment and/or
other parameters on the channel than those specified in Appendix B.
See, e.g., Comments of Twin Cities at 3 (stating intent to use
[[Page 54727]]
another station's existing antenna for KTCI-DT); Comments of Arizona
Board at 1 (stating intent to use its analog channel's existing antenna
for KAET-DT); Comments of Barrington Peoria at 1 (stating intent to use
its analog channel's existing top-mounted antenna site for WHOI-DT);
Comments of Northern Michigan at 2 (stating intent to use its analog
channel's existing antenna site for WNMU-DT); Comments of PTCB at 1
(stating intent to use its analog channel's parameters for KPCB-DT);
and Comments of CBS at 4 (stating intent to use another station's
parameters for KCBS-DT). We find that these speculative or incomplete
requests are not yet ripe for Commission action. If and when these
stations need to request changes to station parameters and have full
information regarding the nature of the changes, the station should
file a request following the procedures appropriate for the change
requested.
53. In response to these premature or speculative requests to
modify facilities, we refer commenters to our discussion in the Third
DTV Periodic Review NPRM concerning the rules and procedures for filing
applications for construction permits to build stations' post-
transition (DTV) facilities and to request authorization to maximize
facilities. We remind stations that they must file construction permit
or modification applications (i.e., FCC Form 301 or 340) if they need
to request authority to construct or modify their post-transition
facilities. Moreover, in the Third DTV Periodic Review NPRM, the
Commission proposed that stations must limit their applications to
those facilities specified in the new DTV Table Appendix B and that
applications requesting facilities that would serve a larger area than
stations' new DTV Table Appendix B facilities would not be accepted.
Stations that wish to apply for reduced facilities may do so, but must
comply with the reduction standard ultimately adopted in the Third DTV
Periodic Report and Order.
54. The appropriate rules, procedures and timing for filing these
applications will depend on whether the station will be using its
current DTV channel or another channel for post-transition operations.
Stations KSWT-DT, KDBC-DT, KJTL-DT and WFXP-DT will use their current
DTV channel for post-transition operations. These stations, and others
that seek to modify their facility on their current DTV channel, may
file an application at any time, provided they comply with the relevant
interference standard and do not violate the filing freeze. In response
to Pappas Entities' request for clarification on this issue, we note
that the filing freeze does not preclude the filing of an application
to modify a construction permit to specify facilities listed for the
station in the post-transition DTV Table Appendix B. Accordingly,
Pappas can file for modification based on current rules and procedures
and does not need a waiver of the freeze. However, to the extent that
Pappas seeks a change in its post-transition DTV facilities that would
result in an expanded or shifted coverage area, such a change would
violate the filing freeze and Pappas must wait until the freeze is
lifted to make such a request.
55. Stations KTCI-DT, KAET-DT, WHOI-DT, WNMU-DT, KPCB-DT, WIPR-DT,
and KCBS-DT will use a different channel from their current DTV channel
for post-transition operations. These stations, and others that seek to
use their analog channel or a new channel for post-transition
operations, may not file an application to construct their post-
transition facilities until the final post-transition rules and
procedures are established by the Report and Order in the Third DTV
Periodic Review proceeding. We recognize that these stations may need
to request different parameters from those specified in the post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B, even though these stations are not
seeking to change the coverage area of their post-transition channel.
These stations should address this situation in their applications for
their post-transition channels. If a station that is moving to a
different channel for post-transition use determines that the
parameters necessary to serve the coverage area specified in the post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B differ from those specified in the
post-transition DTV Table Appendix B, it should apply for those changes
in its application. The Commission will evaluate those applications
using the interference standard and other processing standards adopted
in the Third DTV Periodic Report and Order.
56. We note that some commenters have asked for changes to the
proposed post-transition DTV Table Appendix B facilities to conform to
specific parts of their licensed or authorized facilities. Although we
are allowing stations to change their certifications and post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B facilities to reflect an existing
license or authorization, stations must conform to all portions of that
license or authorization and may not choose various parts of that
license or authorization.
57. WGNO and WNOL, New Orleans, LA. Tribune Television New Orleans,
Inc. (``Tribune''), licensee of station WGNO, channel 26, and permittee
of WGNO-DT, channel 15, New Orleans, LA, received channel 26 for its
TCD in the proposed DTV Table. Tribune is also the licensee of station
WNOL, channel 38, and permittee of WNOL-DT, channel 40, New Orleans,
LA, which received channel 15 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table.
Tribune states that the analog and digital transmission facilities of
both of these stations were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. Tribune
states that it has worked to resume and then improve reduced-power
analog operations for both stations but that it has not yet been able
to restore DTV operations. Tribune is evaluating alternative sites for
the DTV operations of these stations and recently reported that it has
finalized negotiations to relocate the digital operations of the
stations to another tower. Tribune recently filed an ex parte to
request that the proposed DTV allotments for WGNO and WNOL be changed
to reflect the technical parameters for the facilities it will
construct at the new site. The Commission is committed to continuing to
work with stations affected by Hurricane Katrina to help those stations
commence or re-commence operations. Because this request applies to
post-transition operations, we will offer the proposal for further
comment.
Proposals Subject to the Filing Freeze
58. We deny the requests of stations seeking a waiver of the filing
freeze, except for one station which has demonstrated unique
circumstances. Seven stations filed comments requesting a change in
and/or expansion of the facilities specified in the proposed post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B that is inconsistent with the August
2004 filing freeze. This freeze on the filing of certain applications
was imposed to provide for a stable database while the Commission
developed the post-transition DTV Table. The freeze precludes any
expansion of a station's post-transition noise limited service contour
beyond that of the station's certified Grade B contour. The freeze
remains in effect while the DTV Table is being finalized to assist the
Commission in providing stations with authorizations for post-
transition facilities. The stations whose comments are discussed below
are not requesting changes to DTV Table Appendix B to reflect
authorized facilities to which they could have certified on FCC Form
381, consistent with the 0.1 percent interference standard, or to match
constructed and operating facilities. In contrast, the stations
discussed below are requesting changes that violate the filing freeze
and do not meet the criteria
[[Page 54728]]
for a change to certified facilities discussed in the Seventh Further
Notice.
59. For one station, WLAE, New Orleans, LA, we hereby waive the
filing freeze and make the changes requested to the DTV Table Appendix
B adopted herein. For the reasons discussed below, we believe that a
waiver of the freeze for this station is warranted. For the other
stations discussed below, we decline to waive the filing freeze and
decline to make the requested changes to Appendix B. In order to
preserve the integrity of the licensing process and avoid giving
certain stations an unfair advantage over others in seeking expanded
facilities, we have granted waivers of the filing freeze only in very
limited circumstances. In general, before we can consider stations'
requests to modify and, in particular, expand their DTV facilities, we
must first ensure that all stations can at least provide digital
service to their analog viewers by the transition date. Except for the
unique circumstances present in the case of WLAE, we find that these
stations have failed to demonstrate that a waiver of the freeze would
advance their transition to DTV or that the station's circumstances
warrant a waiver of the freeze for any other reason. A description of
these stations' individual circumstances is provided below.
60. WLAE, New Orleans, LA. Educational Broadcasting Foundation,
Inc. (``EBFI''), licensee of NCE station WLAE, channel 32 and permittee
of WLAE-DT, channel 31, New Orleans, LA, received channel 31 for its
TCD in the proposed DTV Table. EBFI did not file a Form 381 for WLAE
and, accordingly, the station received replication facilities in the
proposed post-transition DTV Table Appendix B. At the time that
certifications were due, WLAE-DT had a construction permit for
maximized facilities. In August 2005, WLAE's facilities were destroyed
by Hurricane Katrina. EBFI now asks to change the station's
certification to its previously authorized maximized facilities.
61. We will waive the freeze to allow WLAE-DT to apply for the
maximized facilities specified in its initial construction permit. WLAE
was one of the 41 stations expressly invited to request maximized
facilities for which they would have been allowed to certify. As noted
above, the WLAE-DT maximized facilities were authorized at the time
that certifications were filed. Our actions herein will aid in the
restoration of public television service to the city of New Orleans.
62. WBPG, Gulf Shores, AL. LIN of Alabama, L.L.C. (``LIN''),
singleton licensee of analog station WBPG, channel 55, Gulf Shores, AL,
received channel 25 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. The previous
licensee of WBPG certified on FCC Form 381 that the station did not
have a digital allotment and would operate post-transition based on its
currently authorized analog facilities. In comments filed to this
proceeding, LIN seeks to maximize its Appendix B facilities for WBPG by
increasing its ERP, changing its antenna pattern, and changing
transmitter location. The changes requested would violate the filing
freeze. LIN does not have an existing authorization for these
facilities and does not meet the criteria for a change to certified
facilities discussed in the Seventh Further Notice.
63. WUOA, Tuscaloosa, AL. The Board of Trustees of the University
of Alabama (``University of Alabama''), singleton licensee of analog
station WUOA, channel 23, Tuscaloosa, AL, received channel 23 for its
TCD in the proposed DTV Table. The previous licensee of WUOA, Channel
23, LLC, certified in its FCC Form 381 that it did not have a DTV
channel allotment and intended to operate its post-transition station
based on its currently authorized analog license. In comments filed to
this proceeding, the University of Alabama seeks to maximize the
Appendix B facilities for WUOA by increasing the permitted ERP,
changing the antenna pattern, and changing transmitter location. The
facilities requested would violate the filing freeze. The University of
Alabama does not have an existing authorization for such facilities and
the request does not meet the criteria for a change to certified
facilities discussed in the Seventh Further Notice.
64. KQSD, Lowry, SD. South Dakota Board of Directors for
Educational Telecommunications (``SDBD''), licensee of NCE station
KQSD-TV, channel *11 and KQSD-DT, channel *15, Lowry, SD, received its
analog channel *11 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. In its FCC
Form 381, SDBD certified to replication facilities and was given the
allotted replication facilities in the proposed Appendix B. In its
comments, SDBD requests a change in Appendix B for KQSD-DT to increase
the HAAT and change the geographic coordinates. These changes violate
the filing freeze. KQSD does not have a current authorization for these
facilities and the request does not meet the criteria for a change to
certified facilities discussed in the Seventh Further Notice.
65. KNVA, Austin, TX. 54 Broadcasting, Inc. (``54 Broadcasting''),
licensee of station KNVA, channel 54, and KNVA-DT, channel 49, Austin,
TX, received channel 49 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. In its
FCC Form 381, 54 Broadcasting certified that KNVA would operate post-
transition at maximized facilities as authorized by an existing
construction permit. 54 Broadcasting's comments request that its
allotment be changed to allow operation post-transition at a lower ERP
but using an omnidirectional instead of a directional antenna to
provide more viewers with DTV service. These requested changes would
violate the freeze. KNVA does not have a current authorization for
these facilities and the request does not meet the criteria for a
change to certified facilities discussed in the Seventh Further Notice.
66. KPXC, Denver, CO. Paxson Denver License, Inc. (``Paxson''),
licensee of station KPXC-TV, channel 59, and permittee of KPXC-DT,
channel 43, Denver, CO, received channel 43 for its TCD in the proposed
DTV Table. In its FCC Form 381, Paxson certified to replication
facilities, which are reflected in the proposed Appendix B parameters
for KPXC-DT. In its comments, Paxson seeks a change in KPXC's certified
facilities to conform to those it recently requested in a January 2007
construction permit application, including a site change. Paxson states
that the would-be tower owner at the original KPXC-DT site received
initial local zoning board approval from the Board of Commissioners of
Jefferson County in 2003, which was affirmed by the Jefferson County
District Court. In 2006, however, the decision was overturned by the
Colorado Appeals Court which remanded the case to the Board of
Commissioners. The Board of Commissioners subsequently sought
certiorari from the Colorado Supreme Court, which has yet to make a
decision. Paxson states it ``has no expectation that it could construct
the station on Mt. Morrison before the statutory termination of analog
service'' and it would thus be ``more reasonable for the allotment to
correspond to the parameters proposed in the new CP application.''
67. Paxson's request would result in a significant shift in the
area served by KPXC, such that the station's digital signal would not
reach a large area that is currently served by this station, and would
violate the filing freeze. We are concerned, however, about the zoning
issue faced by this station and by Paxson's stated expectation that it
will not be able to construct its full DTV facility before the
transition deadline on February 17, 2009. While we do not believe that
shifting Paxson's coverage as proposed is the proper resolution, and
therefore deny Paxson's request for a waiver of the freeze, we hereby
invite
[[Page 54729]]
Paxson to propose another site that would result in a less dramatic
change to its current service area and population. We will consider
such a request in the application process following adoption of the
Report and Order in the Third DTV Periodic Review proceeding. We also
urge Paxson to keep us informed concerning progress and events in the
zoning case in Colorado.
68. WMHT, Schenectady, NY. WMHT Educational Telecommunications
(``WMHT''), licensee of NCE station WMHT-TV, channel *17, and permittee
of WMHT-DT, channel *34, Schenectady, NY, received channel *34 for its
TCD in the proposed DTV Table. In its comments, WMHT supports the
proposed allotment of channel *34 but requests a change of its
community of license from Schenectady to Albany. WMHT argues that it
should be allowed to change its community of license because its market
is defined as a hyphenated market, Schenectady-Albany, in the NTSC
Table of Allotments. In addition, WMHT argues that the station's ``Troy
studio and Altamont tower locations permit it to serve the entire New
York Capital District and beyond.'' No other comments were filed
related to this TCD.
69. We decline to make the allotment change requested by WMHT at
this time. The Commission did not use hyphenated markets in the initial
DTV Table and did not use hyphenated markets in the new DTV Table
proposed in the Seventh Further Notice. While the market may have been
hyphenated in the NTSC Table, WMHT's license lists the station's market
as Schenectady and not as a hyphenated market. WMHT's request to change
its community of license is precluded by the Commission's filing
freeze. We further conclude that WMHT has not demonstrated that a
waiver of the freeze is warranted. WMHT does not suggest that the
change in community of license is necessary to advance its digital
transition process. Instead, WMHT states only that the proposed change
``entails no change in the current operation,'' ``will result in no
diminution of service to Schenectady,'' and is intended for ``future
state funding, grant funding, and membership recruitment'' because an
Albany community license provides ``greater recognition to the
licensee's operations.'' We note that WMHT may seek a change in its
community of license after the freeze is lifted, consistent with the
Commission's rules for post-transition operations.
Stations Not Eligible To Participate in the Channel Election Process
70. We deny the requests of pending applicants for a new television
station to add new allotments to the post-transition DTV Table.
Comments were filed by such pending applicants arguing that the
Commission failed to include such allotments in the proposed DTV Table.
In each case, the commenter has an application for a construction
permit for a new television station on the requested new allotment
pending at the Commission. In the Second DTV Periodic Report and Order,
the Commission made it clear that only Commission licensees and
permittees would be eligible to participate in the channel election
process. Applicants for new stations and petitioners for new allotments
were expressly excluded from making elections. In the Seventh Further
Notice, we noted that a number of pending applications for new
television stations had been granted since the start of the channel
election process, and we accommodated those permittees with TCDs in the
proposed DTV Table. In addition, we announced a method by which we
would assign TCDs to other new permittees whose pending applications
for new television stations were granted before an Order finalizing the
DTV Table is adopted. We also stated that, before the end of the
transition, we would issue an NPRM to amend the DTV Table in order to
allot a DTV channel for each remaining authorized facility that does
not have an allotted DTV channel. Thus, if any other pending
applications are granted before the end of the transition, we will
attempt to accommodate these stations with a DTV channel for post
transition operation.
Stations Awaiting International Coordination
71. In the Seventh Further Notice, the Commission noted that
proposed allotments near the U.S.-Canadian and U.S.-Mexican borders
require coordination with those countries. The Commission stated that
our international negotiations are continuing in a cooperative manner
and we indicated that we do not believe that these negotiations will
delay stations' ability to construct their post-transition facilities.
We continue to believe that international coordination of digital
allotments will proceed in a manner that will allow affected stations
to construct digital facilities by the transition deadline. In some
cases, however, stations may need to proceed with constructing
authorized facilities to the extent approved by Canada or Mexico, even
if those facilities differ from the preferred facilities sought by the
station, if international coordination issues arise that delay action
on a pending application and those issues cannot be resolved in time to
allow construction to be completed before the end of the transition.
72. We note that all stations in the U.S.-Canadian or U.S.-Mexican
border area with a TCD on a channel that is not their current digital
channel will have to file an application for the TCD channel following
adoption of the Report and Order in the Third DTV Periodic Review
proceeding. A list of these stations is attached hereto in Appendix D4.
The Commission is working to coordinate all Appendix B facilities as a
group so that individual applications do not need to be coordinated. If
there are circumstances where this is not possible, the Commission will
work with these stations to expedite international coordination of
their applications.
73. In the Seventh Further Notice, the Commission identified two
allotments for which it had received recent objections from Industry
Canada: WBSF-DT, (TCD on channel 46), Bay City, MI and KAYU-DT, (TCD on
channel 28), Spokane, WA. The Commission included the TCDs for these
channels in the proposed DTV Table, but sought comment from these
licensees concerning whether they are willing to reduce coverage on the
TCD in order to address Canadian concerns. The Commission also noted
that these licensees could request an alternative post-transition DTV
allotment. Both of these stations have filed comments indicating their
belief that the current proposed TCD does not in fact cause
impermissible interference, and have submitted engineering statements
in support of their positions. These stations request that the
Commission continue to negotiate with Industry Canada to permit them to
operate on the TCD proposed in the Seventh Further Notice. We are
adopting our proposed allotments for these stations, subject to our
continuing negotiations with Canada which relate to these allotments as
well as all other new DTV allotments in the border area.
Resolution of TCDs Pending After Round Three
74. We adopt our tentative conclusions in the Seventh Further
Notice with respect to the resolution of four allotments that remained
outstanding after TCDs were announced for the third round of channel
elections. The Commission noted that these TCDs represented challenging
and difficult
[[Page 54730]]
cases in crowded markets necessitating waiver of the freeze or the 0.1
percent interference standard in order to find appropriate channels for
post-transition operation that would ensure the best possible service
to the public and promote overall spectrum efficiency. We received
comments from some of the parties involved in these cases and address
each of these proposed allotments below.
75. WABC, New York, NY. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.
(``ABC''), the licensee of station WABC-TV, channel 7 and WABC-DT,
channel 45, New York, NY, was granted a waiver of the 0.1 percent
interference standard in the Seventh Further Notice and received
channel 7 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. ABC and The New Jersey
Public Broadcasting Authority (``NJPBA''), the permittee of WNJB-DT,
channel *8, New Brunswick, NJ, filed comments related to this TCD.
During the channel election process, NJPBA initially objected to the
grant of a waiver for WABC and later sought a waiver of the freeze to
move its digital operations on channel 8 to New York City. These
arguments were fully considered by the Commission in deciding to grant
ABC's request for waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard,
required in light of the predicted 2.8 percent new interference to
WNJB. The Commission concluded that the loss of service for WABC would
affect current viewers of WABC, while the predicted loss of service for
WNJB would affect areas outside of its current service area and
primarily outside of the state of New Jersey. The Commission noted that
WABC has been a pioneer of digital service, having built full-power
digital operations in 2001 and re-built them first at Four Times Square
and then on the Empire State Building, with a back-up facility at
Alpine Tower in New Jersey, after the September 11, 2001 loss of the
World Trade Center. In addition, the Commission noted that allotting
channel 7 to WABC would eliminate any interference concerns between
WABC and both WEDH-TV, an NCE station in Hartford, CT (analog channel
*24, post-transition digital channel *45), and WOLF-TV in Hazleton, PA
(analog channel 56, post-transition digital channel 45).
76. Because ABC sought the waiver during the channel election
process, both parties had an opportunity to present their arguments
prior to the adoption of the Seventh Further Notice. We find that NJPBA
has not raised any new arguments that would cause us to reverse our
grant of the interference standard waiver to ABC. We note that NJPBA
contests the Commission's statement in the Seventh Further Notice that
WNJB had not built its digital facility. In fact, WNJB has built only
smaller DTV facilities pursuant to STA and has still not constructed
its full, authorized DTV facility, in contrast to WABC's early
construction and rebuilding of full DTV facilities after the September
11, 2001 destruction of their facilities.
77. NJPBA also claims that, based on an agreement between the
parties, it is entitled to a waiver of the Commission's current freeze
on modification applications and thereby allowed to co-locate its
transmitting facilities at Four Times Square in New York City. As noted
by ABC, NJPBA did not file its application and waiver request to modify
WNJB-DT's facilities until after release of the Seventh Further Notice.
Moreover, NJPBA offers no showing that it could not achieve its
transition absent a waiver of the freeze. Thus, we disagree with NJPBA
that allotment of channel 7 to ABC necessitates, or entitles NJPBA to,
a waiver of the freeze. The Media Bureau will consider WNJB's
application and waiver request in the normal course of processing. As
noted in the Seventh Further Notice, consideration of NJPBA's
application is best left until after the filing freeze is lifted.
Accordingly, we allot channel 7 to WABC.
78. WEDH, Hartford, CT and WEDN, Norwich, CT. Connecticut Public
Broadcasting, Inc. (``CPBI''), the licensee of NCE stations WEDH,
channel *24, permittee of WEDH-DT, channel *32, Hartford, CT and WEDN,
channel *53, permittee of WEDN-DT, channel *9, Norwich, CT, received a
TCD of channel *45 for WEDH in Hartford and a TCD of channel *9 for
WEDN in Norwich in the proposed DTV Table. In proposing these
allotments, the Commission found it necessary to supersede a pending
swap application and rulemaking pertaining to CPBI's pre-transition
facilities. CPBI filed comments in favor of these proposed allotments.
No comments were filed opposing these proposed allotments. Accordingly,
we allot channel *45 to WEDH, Hartford, CT and channel *9 to WEDN,
Norwich, CT.
79. Although CPBI supported the post-transition allotments, it
objected to the Commission's decision to supersede the swap application
and channel substitution rulemaking proceedings associated with the
changes CPBI requested for its Hartford and Norwich stations. We cannot
reinstate these applications without vitiating the basis for the post-
transition channel allotments for WEDH and WEDN. We recognize, however,
that CPBI wants to use their new allotments for pre-transition DTV
operations. In that regard, we note that the Third DTV Periodic Review
NPRM seeks comment on a proposal to allow stations that are moving to
new post-transition channels (such as WEDH and WEDN) to begin operating
on their new channels before the transition date, under certain
conditions. If such a proposal is adopted, CPBI would be able to apply
for pre-transition DTV operations on their new allotments.
80. KTFK, Stockton, CA. Telefutura Sacramento, LLC
(``Telefutura''), the licensee of station KTFK-TV, channel 64, and
KTFK-DT, channel 62, Stockton, CA, was granted a waiver of the filing
freeze in the Seventh Further Notice to permit it to modify KTFK's
certified facilities and receive channel 26 for its TCD in the proposed
DTV Table. No comments were filed opposing this proposed allotment.
Accordingly, we adopt this TCD and allot channel 26 to KTFK, Stockton,
CA.
81. KVIE, Sacramento, CA. KVIE, Inc., the licensee of NCE station
KVIE, channel *6 and KVIE-DT, channel *53, Sacramento, CA, was granted
a waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard and received channel
*9 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. KVIE, Inc. filed comments in
favor of the proposed allotment. No comments were filed opposing this
proposed allotment. Accordingly, we adopt this TCD and allot channel *9
to KVIE(TV), Sacramento, CA.
TCDs for New Permittees Granted During Proceeding
82. We adopt the TCDs announced for the six new permittees in the
New Permittees Public Notice (72 FR 2485, January 19, 2007) (``New
Permittees Public Notice''). As discussed, supra, six pending
applications were granted during this rulemaking, and proposed TCDs for
the new permittees were published for comment in the New Permittees
Public Notice. There were no comments, or only favorable comments,
regarding the TCDs of five of the permittees, and they are therefore
included in this Report and Order's modified DTV Table and Appendix B.
An objection was raised to the TCD of one of the new permittees, and is
discussed below.
83. KCWV, Duluth, MN. George S. Flinn, III, new permittee of
station KCWV-TV, channel 27, Duluth, MN, received channel 27 for KCWV's
TCD in the Public Notice. The State of Wisconsin--Educational
Communications Board (``ECB'') filed comments in opposition. ECB is the
licensee of NCE station WHWC-DT, Channel *27, Menomonie, WI, which
[[Page 54731]]
received channel 27 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. ECB states
its belief that the proposed allotment of channel 27 to Duluth ``would
cause interference to WHWC-DT for 10,995 persons, or 1.290 percent of
its noise limited service area,'' including ``new interference from
Duluth channel 27 of 0.345 percent of the population served.'' ECB asks
the Commission to instead assign channel 47 to KCWV, arguing that such
an allotment ``would cause considerably less interference.'' Mr. Flinn
did not file a reply.
84. Prior to the issuance of the New Permittees Public Notice, the
TCDs of all new permittees were analyzed using computer software
techniques that have been validated through extensive testing and
comparison of results with similar software used by other parties
participating in this proceeding. At that time, the Commission's
interference analysis indicated that no station would receive
impermissible interference from KCWV's TCD. We have considered the
analysis offered in ECB's pleadings, and we find that they do not match
our findings. We are confident that the results of our interference
analysis are correct and accurately reflect the service areas to be
provided with the facilities specified and the interference conditions
that are expected to be present among stations. We therefore include
KCWV in the modified DTV Table and Appendix B.
Stations To Be Deleted From the DTV Table
85. Two stations, Delta College, licensee of NCE station WDCP-TV,
University Center, MI, analog channel *19 and permittee of DTV channel
*18, and Rockfleet Broadcasting II, LLC, (``Rockfleet'') licensee of
station WFUP, channel 45, and permittee of WFUP-DT, channel 59,
Vanderbilt, MI (satellite station of WFUX-TV, Cadillac, MI), have
notified us that they do not intend to construct DTV facilities and
will cease operation after February 17, 2009. Delta College filed a
comment and requested that we delete the TCD for WDCP on channel 18
from the Table of Allotments.
86. Rockfleet notified us during the first round of the channel
elections that it does not intend to construct a post-transition DTV
facility for WFUP. Rockfleet explained that Vanderbilt will be served
by the digital signal of WFUX-DT. Consequently, we did not assign a TCD
for this station. Rockfleet will surrender its license for cancellation
after February 17, 2009.
4. Other Requests
87. WSWP, Grandview, WV. We grant the request of West Virginia
Educational Broadcasting Authority (``WVEBA''), licensee of NCE station
WSWP-TV, channel *9 and permittee of WSWP-DT, channel *53, Grandview,
WV, which received channel *10 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table,
for a waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard up to 2.0 percent
and to the extent that it is consistent with the filing freeze. WVEBA
requests a waiver of the 0.1 percent interference standard, claiming
that WSWP-DT cannot replicate the station's existing analog service
area on the proposed allotment for channel *10. Davis Television
Clarksburg, LLC (``DTC''), permittee of WVFX-DT, channel 10,
Clarksburg, WV, and TCD on channel 10 in the proposed DTV Table, filed
reply comments opposing WVEBA's waiver request.
88. In the first channel election round, WVEBA elected its analog
channel *9; however, this election was determined to cause more than
2.0 percent new interference, and, thus, disapproved. In the second
round, WVEBA elected channel 11, but this election was also rejected
because it was determined to cause more than 0.1 percent new
interference. In the third round, WVEBA elected channel 10. This
election was also determined to cause more than 0.1 percent new
interference. Consequently, WVEBA received channel *10 as its TCD, but
at reduced facilities in order to bring the station into compliance
with the 0.1 percent interference standard. Specifically, WSWP's ERP
was reduced to 2.5 kW. In response to the Third Round TCD PN, WVEBA
filed a ``Request for Partial Reconsideration,'' supporting its
proposed channel allotment, but requesting to operate at 10 kW in order
to ``adequately serve the station's current audience.''
89. The Seventh Further Notice proposed channel *10 as WSWP's TCD
at 2.5 kW ERP in the post-transition DTV Table. WVEBA filed comments in
response to the Seventh Further Notice and now asks for 20 kW ERP.
WVEBA contends that this power level is necessary for the station to
replicate its analog coverage.
90. WVEBA certified to its replication facilities on Form 381.
WVEBA claims that its current analog station serves 906,075 people and
that its proposed operation of its digital facility on channel 10 at 20
kW ERP would serve 900,098 people. WVEBA further asserts that its
proposal to operate WSWP at 20 kW ERP will result in new interference
of 0.7 percent to WVFX-DT, which it acknowledges exceeds the 0.1
percent interference standard, but claims is necessary ``to meet its
certification to replicate its NTSC coverage.'' DTC replies that WVEBA
overstates WSWP's present analog population coverage and understates
the interference to WVFX-DT, claiming that WVEBA's proposal would cause
more than 1.4 percent new interference.
91. We agree with DTC that WVEBA overstates WSWP's present analog
population coverage, but we also concur with WVEBA that WSWP-DT's
operation at the proposed 2.5 kW ERP would not fully replicate its
existing analog coverage. We also find, however, that operation of
channel *10 at 20 kW ERP would exceed the station's certified
replication facilities and violate the current freeze on expansion of a
noise limited service contour beyond its certified replication contour.
To resolve the conflict, we have analyzed WSWP's channel facilities
using a modified replication approach to derive the proposed facilities
from the analog Grade B contour on which the initial DTV Table
facilities were based and determined that WSWP could replicate its
analog coverage at 18.6 kW. Operation of WSWP-DT at 18.6 kW, however,
would cause 1.73 percent new interference to WVFX-DT, which exceeds the
0.1 percent interference standard. Therefore, we must consider WVEBA's
waiver request.
92. In evaluating WVEBA's request for a waiver of the 0.1 percent
interference standard, we find that although WVEBA's circumstances are
dissimilar to two stations that were granted waivers in the Seventh
Further Notice, WVEBA does offer important public interest bases that
merit a waiver in this case. First, WVEBA had an out-of-core DTV
channel, which would have warranted a 2.0 percent interference
allowance to elect its analog channel *9 in the first round. However,
use of channel 9 would have exceeded the 2.0 percent standard. Second,
although there are UHF channels available in its market, WVEBA has
argued persuasively that a UHF channel would not replicate the
station's analog coverage due to the mountainous terrain in WSWP's
service area and would require this educational station to incur
``significant increased capital and operational costs.'' Third, NCE
station WSWP offers unique educational programming to an economically
disadvantaged community that relies on over-the-air broadcasting for
their TV service.
93. Our analysis indicates that WSWP's operation on channel 10 with
full replication facilities would cause less total interference than
would its
[[Page 54732]]
operation on channel 9, 11 or any other high VHF channel. We conclude
that WSWP would have been eligible for up to 2.0 percent new
interference using its own analog channel 9 for post-transition DTV
operation. Operation on channel 9 would have exceeded 2.0 percent new
interference, while operation on channel 10 at 18.6 kW does not.
Therefore, we grant WVEBA's request for waiver of the 0.1 percent
interference standard and establish its Appendix B facilities at 18.6
kW ERP on channel *10.
94. KTAZ, Phoenix, AZ. We grant the request of NBC Telemundo
License, Co. (``NBC Telemundo''), licensee of singleton station KTAZ,
channel 39, Phoenix, AZ, which received channel 39 for its TCD in the
proposed DTV Table, to change station KTAZ's post-transition DTV Table
Appendix B facilities. In 2005, the Commission approved a modification
to the analog Table of Allotments sought by NBC Telemundo and Community
Television Educators, Inc. (``CTE'') which substituted Channel 39 for
noncommercial reserved Channel 39 (*39) in Phoenix, substituted
noncommercial reserved Channel 11 (*11) for Channel 11 in Holbrook,
Arizona, and authorized NBC Telemundo to operate on Channel 39 in
Phoenix and CTE to operate on Channel *11 in Holbrook. The Commission
subsequently granted minor modification applications filed by the
parties to implement the channel substitutions. The proposed post-
transition DTV Table Appendix B lists the Facility ID for the former
Channel *39 facility for KTAZ, rather than the Facility ID for the new
Channel 39 facility. NBC Telemundo requests that Appendix B be revised
to reflect the correct Facility ID for the new Channel 39 facility.
95. In addition, NBC Telemundo states that the technical facilities
specified in Appendix B for Channel 39 are no longer accurate. KTAZ
does not have a paired digital channel. The technical facilities
specified in Appendix B for Channel 39 reflect the digital parameters
applied for by CTE prior to the channel substitutions. NBC Telemundo
states that it recently relocated the Channel 39 analog facility to a
new tower.
96. We have revised DTV Table Appendix B as adopted herein to
reflect operation of a digital station on Channel 39 in Phoenix with
parameters reflected in the analog authorization approved by the
Commission for KTAZ. In addition, we have revised Appendix B to reflect
the correct Facility ID for both KTAZ and Channel *11 in Holbrook.
97. WNYA, Pittsfield, MA. In response to comments filed opposing
the proposed post-transition facilities of WNYA, Pittsfield, MA, we
will change station WNYA's post-transition DTV Table Appendix B
facilities. Venture Technologies Group, LLC, licensee of singleton
station WNYA, channel 51, Pittsfield, MA, received channel 13 for its
TCD in the proposed post-transition DTV Table. WNYT-TV, LLC (``WNYT''),
licensee of station WNYT, channel 13, and WNYT-DT, channel 12, Albany,
NY, which received channel 12 for its TCD in the proposed post-
transition DTV Table, objects to the facilities proposed for WNYA in
the post-transition DTV Table Appendix B. WNYA did not respond to the
WNYT comments.
98. The proposed post-transition DTV Table Appendix B specifies a
site change for WNYA which would move that station's DTV facility from
the WNYA analog site in Pittsfield to WNYT's licensed site near Albany.
WNYA specified this site change in its second round conflict decision
form (FCC Form 385) to resolve an interference conflict of 3.7 percent
with WNYT, which resulted from WNYA's election of channel 13. In its
comments, WNYT claims that the ERP of 28kW that is proposed for WNYA in
Appendix B, is substantially in excess of that permitted for a DTV
station on channel 13 in Zone 1. WNYT requests that the Commission
revise Appendix B for WNYA to specify the Pittsfield site for that
station with parameters that would permit WNYA to comply with its FCC
Form 381 certification.
99. WNYT is correct that the power specified in the proposed
Appendix B for WNYA exceeds the maximum allowed pursuant to
73.622(f)(7)(ii). At an HAAT of 396 meters, the maximum ERP for a
channel 13, Zone 1 DTV station is 12.6 kW. However, WNYT's request that
we change WNYA's Appendix B facilities to specify the Pittsfield
transmitter site would not address the interference conflict found in
round 2 of the channel election process.
100. We conclude that WNYA can serve most of its certified coverage
area from the site near Albany, at reduced power. We have determined
that WNYA can provide an acceptable predicted field strength over
Pittsfield, Massachusetts, its city of license, based on its FCC Form
385 facilities with its maximum ERP reduced from the proposed 28 kW to
12.6 kW. In addition, at this reduced power, WNYA's operation on
channel 13 will cause any additional interference. Therefore, we are
changing Appendix B to specify an ERP for WNYA of 12.6 kW.
101. WLFL, Raleigh, NC. We deny the request of Sinclair Broadcast
Group, Inc. (``Sinclair''), the parent entity of the licensee of
station WLFL, channel 22 and permittee of WLFL-DT, channel 57, Raleigh,
NC, which received channel 27 for its TCD in the proposed DTV Table. We
conclude that it is not necessary to increase the ERP for this station.
102. In its Form 381, Sinclair certified to maximized facilities
for WLFL-DT as authorized by its construction permit. In the first
round, Sinclair obtained a TCD for channel 27 through an approved NCA
with station WRDC, Durham, NC. Sinclair's comments claim that the power
listed for channel 27 on Appendix B is incorrect. In fact, the proposed
channel 27 power is less than the certified channel 57 power so that
the post-transition facilities will match the certified facilities'
coverage. Consequently, no change in Appendix B is needed to provide
WLFL-DT with its certified coverage.
103. KCET, Los Angeles, CA. Community Television of Southern
California (``CTSC''), licensee of NCE station KCET, channel *28, and
KCET-DT, channel *59, Los Angeles, CA, received channel *28 for its TCD
in the proposed DTV Table. CTSC states in its comments that it
certified that it would operate noncommercial educational station KCET
with maximized facilities on channel *28 for post-transition operations
but the Commission disapproved the election because it was projected to
cause interference of 2.3 percent to the elected DTV channel 27 of
KEYT, Santa Barbara, California (analog channel 3, post-transition
digital channel 27). CTSC states that it changed its election to
specify replication facilities on channel *28 but reserved its right to
seek maximized facilities should circumstances permit.
104. On July 7, 2006, Smith Media License Holdings, LLC (``Smith'')
filed a letter requesting a waiver of the July 1, 2006 replication/
maximization deadline with respect to KEYT-DT. In that letter, Smith
indicated that for KEYT-DT to operate with its allotted replication
facilities, as the prior owner certified, Smith would have to increase
the ERP for KEYT to approximately 698 kW. Smith indicated that, because
of electrical capacity limits at the station's antenna site, it did not
anticipate being able to increase power at the antenna site until near
the end of the DTV transition.
105. According to CTSC, the maximized facilities it originally
proposed for KCET-DT on Channel *28 would not cause impermissible
[[Page 54733]]
interference to the facilities of KEYT-DT on Channel *27 if KEYT-DT
operates with an ERP of 699 kW. Accordingly, CTSC requests that the
Commission change DTV Table Appendix B to specify maximized parameters
for KCET-DT. Smith objects to CTSC's request and urges the Commission
to continue to protect the KEYT-DT post-transition allotment. We deny
the request of CTSC to change DTV Table Appendix B for KCET. We note
the disagreement of CTSC, but have already determined that the KCET
maximized facilities would cause interference to the certified
facilities of KEYT-DT on its TCD in excess of the permissible limit.
Our analysis was performed using computer software techniques that have
been validated through extensive testing and comparison of results with
similar software used by other parties participating in this
proceeding. We are confident that the result of our interference
analysis is correct, and there is no agreement with the affected
station to accept this interference. The Commission will determine in
the Third DTV Periodic Review Report and Order what interference
standards and other procedures to apply to stations seeking to file
applications for changes to station parameters post-transition. KCET
may choose to file an application at that time.
Procedural Matters
Seventh Report and Order
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
106. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(``RFA''), the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (``FRFA'') relating to this Seventh Report and Order.
Final Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
107. This Seventh Report and Order was analyzed with respect to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA'') and does not contain any
information collection requirements.
Congressional Review Act
108. The Commission will send a copy of this Seventh Report and
Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
109. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (``RFA'') an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'')
was incorporated in the Seventh Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(``Seventh Further Notice''). The Commission sought written public
comment on the proposals in the NPRM, including comment on the IRFA.
The comments received are discussed below. The Commission received no
comments on the IRFA. This present Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (``FRFA'') conforms to the RFA.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Report and Order
110. This Seventh Report and Order (``Seventh R&O'') adopts rules
implementing a new post-transition DTV Table of Allotments (``DTV
Table''), providing all eligible full power broadcast television
stations with channels for DTV operations after the transition. The new
post-transition DTV Table finalizes the channel and facilities
necessary to complete the digital transition for full power television
stations, including full power commercial and noncommercial broadcast
television stations.
111. The new post-transition DTV Table is based on the tentative
channel designations (``TCDs'') announced for eligible broadcast
licensees through the channel election process, as well as on the
Commission's efforts to promote overall spectrum efficiency and ensure
the best possible service to the public, including service to local
communities. During this election process, which was established by the
Second DTV Periodic Report and Order, eligible full power broadcast
licensees selected their ultimate DTV channel inside the ``core
spectrum,'' consisting of current television channels 2 through 51 (54-
698 MHz). In developing the proposed new allotments, the Commission
sought to accommodate broadcasters' channel preferences, as well as
their replication and maximization service area certifications (made
via FCC Form 381).
112. The new post-transition DTV Table achieves the goals set forth
for the channel election process. First, the new DTV Table provides all
eligible stations with channels for DTV operations after the
transition. Second, the new DTV Table is the result of informed
decisions by licensees when making their channel elections and
licensees benefited from the clarity and transparency of the channel
election process. Third, the new DTV Table recognizes industry
expectations by protecting existing service and respecting investments
already made, to the extent feasible. Finally, the new DTV Table
reflects our efforts to promote overall spectrum efficiency and ensure
the best possible DTV service to the public.
B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response
to the IRFA
113. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the
rules and policies proposed in the IRFA.
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Rules Will Apply
114. The RFA directs the Commission to provide a description of
and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that
will be affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small government
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA). The rules of this Seventh R&O will primarily
affect full power television stations, as opposed to low power
television stations and television translator stations. A description
of such small entities, as well as an estimate of the number of such
small entities, is provided below.
115. Television Broadcasting. The rules and policies adopted in
this Seventh R&O apply to television broadcast licensees and potential
licensees of television service. The SBA defines a television broadcast
station as a small business if such station has no more than $13.5
million in annual receipts. Business concerns included in this industry
are those ``primarily engaged in broadcasting images together with
sound.'' The Commission has estimated the number of licensed commercial
television stations to be 1,376. According to Commission staff review
of the BIA Financial Network, MAPro Television Database (``BIA'') on
March 30, 2007, about 986 of an estimated 1,374 commercial television
stations (or about 72 percent) have revenues of $13.5 million or less
and thus qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. The
Commission has estimated the number of licensed NCE television stations
to be 380. We note, however, that, in assessing whether a business
concern qualifies as small under the above definition, business
(control) affiliations must be included. Our estimate, therefore,
likely overstates the number of small entities that might be affected
by our action, because the
[[Page 54734]]
revenue figure on which it is based does not include or aggregate
revenues from affiliated companies. The Commission does not compile and
otherwise does not have access to information on the revenue of NCE
stations that would permit it to determine how many such stations would
qualify as small entities.
116. In addition, an element of the definition of ``small
business'' is that the entity not be dominant in its field of
operation. We are unable at this time to define or quantify the
criteria that would establish whether a specific television station is
dominant in its field of operation. Accordingly, the estimate of small
businesses to which rules may apply do not exclude any television
station from the definition of a small business on this basis and are
therefore over-inclusive to that extent. Also as noted, an additional
element of the definition of ``small business'' is that the entity must
be independently owned and operated. We note that it is difficult at
times to assess these criteria in the context of media entities and our
estimates of small businesses to which they apply may be over-inclusive
to this extent.
117. Class A TV, LPTV, and TV translator stations. The rules and
policies adopted in this Seventh R&O do not directly affect low power
television stations, as the DTV Table adopted in the Seventh R&O
finalizes post-transition digital channels only for full power
television stations. Nonetheless, as discussed in Section E, infra, low
power television stations will also eventually transition from analog
to digital technology and may be indirectly affected by the channel
allotment decisions herein. The broadcast stations indirectly affected
include licensees of Class A TV stations, low power television (LPTV)
stations, and TV translator stations, as well as to potential licensees
in these television services. The same SBA definition that applies to
television broadcast licensees would apply to these stations. The SBA
defines a television broadcast station as a small business if such
station has no more than $13.5 million in annual receipts. Currently,
there are approximately 567 licensed Class A stations, 2,227 licensed
LPTV stations, and 4,518 licensed TV translators. Given the nature of
these services, we will presume that all of these licensees qualify as
small entities under the SBA definition. We note, however, that under
the SBA's definition, revenue of affiliates that are not LPTV stations
should be aggregated with the LPTV station revenues in determining
whether a concern is small. Our estimate may thus overstate the number
of small entities since the revenue figure on which it is based does
not include or aggregate revenues from non-LPTV affiliated companies.
We do not have data on revenues of TV translator or TV booster
stations, but virtually all of these entities are also likely to have
revenues of less than $13.5 million and thus may be categorized as
small, except to the extent that revenues of affiliated non-translator
or booster entities should be considered.
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements
118. The rules adopted in this Seventh R&O involve no changes to
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements beyond what
is already required under the current regulations.
E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and
Significant Alternatives Considered
119. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach,
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1)
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small
entities.
120. The new post-transition DTV Table provides all eligible full
power broadcast television stations--large and small alike--with
channels for post-transition DTV operations. Small broadcasters, just
like large ones, benefited from participating in the channel election
process. The new DTV Table is the result of informed decisions by
licensees when making their channel elections, and all licensees
benefited from the clarity and transparency of the channel election
process. Moreover, the new DTV Table recognizes industry expectations
by protecting existing service and respecting investments already made,
for both large and small broadcasters, to the extent feasible. The TCDs
are primarily based on the channels elected by licensees. The vast
majority of licensees participating in the channel election process
received a TCD for a channel they elected, and all comments, including
those from small broadcasters, were considered when finalizing this
Table.
121. In general, our goal in reviewing the comments filed in
response to the proposed Table was to accommodate the requests made by
commenters to the extent possible consistent with the standards
outlined in the Seventh Further Notice. Large and small broadcasters
alike benefited from this approach, which was taken in an effort to
expedite finalization of the DTV Table and Appendix B so that stations
can complete construction of their post-transition facilities by the
statutory deadline for the DTV transition. Where commenters made
specific requests for changes to the proposals in the Seventh Further
Notice, requests that provided for an alternative service area for the
station or parameters that differed from those proposed by the
Commission, those requests were granted to the extent possible
consistent with the standards of the Seventh Further Notice and, in
particular, with the applicable interference standards. This process
has been open and transparent, and has provided consistent treatment
for large and small broadcasters.
122. The new DTV Table adopted herein does not provide for channels
for low power television stations. The Commission will address the
digital transition for low power television (``LPTV'') stations in a
separate proceeding. The statutory transition deadline established by
Congress in 2006--February 17, 2009--applies only to full-power
stations. One of the Commission's goals in the Seventh Report and Order
is to permit full power stations to finalize their post-transition
facilities by this rapidly approaching deadline. The Commission
previously determined that it has discretion under 47 U.S.C. 336(f)(4)
to set the date by which analog operations of stations in the low power
and translator service must cease. The Commission has stated that the
intent is to ensure that low power and translator stations not be
required to prematurely convert to digital operation in a manner that
could disrupt their analog service or, more importantly, that might
cause them to cease operation. The Commission decided not to establish
a fixed termination date for the low power digital television
transition until it resolved the issues concerning the transition of
full-power television stations. The Commission has recognized that low
power television stations are a valuable component of the nation's
television system and has stated its intention to facilitate, wherever
possible, the digital transition of these stations.
[[Page 54735]]
F. Report To Congress
The Commission will send a copy of this Seventh R&O, including this
FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. In addition, the
Commission will send a copy of this Seventh R&O, including the FRFA, to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A
copy of this Seventh R&O and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be
published in the Federal Register.
Ordering Clauses
123. It is ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained in
sections 1, 4(i) and (j), 7, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319,
324, 336, and 337 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i) and (j), 157, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 324, 336,
and 337, this Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of
Proposed Rule Making is adopted.
124. It is further ordered that pursuant to the authority contained
in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 303, 303a, 303b, and 307 of the Communications
Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 303a, 303b, and 307, the
Commission's rules are hereby amended as set forth in the rule changes.
125. It is further ordered that the rules as set forth in the rule
changes shall be effective 30 days after publication of the Seventh
Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in
the Federal Register.
126. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a
copy of this Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of this
Seventh Report and Order and Eighth Further Notice of Proposed Rule
Making in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
List of Subjects in 47 CFR part 73
Television.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 part 73 as follows:
PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
0
1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.
0
2. Section 73.622 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.622 Digital television table of allotments.
* * * * *
(i) Post-Transition Table of DTV Allotments.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community Channel No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anniston.................................... 9
Bessemer.................................... 18
Birmingham.................................. *10, 13, 30, 36, 50
Demopolis................................... *19
Dothan...................................... 21, 36
Dozier...................................... *10
Florence.................................... 14, 20, *22
Gadsden..................................... 26, 45
Gulf Shores................................. 25
Homewood.................................... 28
Huntsville.................................. 19, *24, 32, 41, 49
Louisville.................................. *44
Mobile...................................... 9, 15, 20, 23, 27, *41
Montgomery.................................. 12, 16, *27, 32, 46
Mount Cheaha................................ *7
Opelika..................................... 47
Ozark....................................... 33
Selma....................................... 29, 42
Troy........................................ 48
Tuscaloosa.................................. 23, 33
Tuskegee.................................... 22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALASKA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anchorage................................... 5, *8, 10, 12, 20, *26, 28, 32
Bethel...................................... *3
Fairbanks................................... 7, *9, 11, 18
Juneau...................................... *10, 11
Ketchikan................................... 13
North Pole.................................. 20
Sitka....................................... 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARIZONA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Douglas..................................... 36
Flagstaff................................... 2, 13, 18, 32
Green Valley................................ 46
Holbrook.................................... *11
Kingman..................................... 19
Mesa........................................ 12
Phoenix..................................... *8, 10, 15, 17, 20, 24, 26, 33, 39, 49
Prescott.................................... 7
Sierra Vista................................ 44
Tolleson.................................... 51
Tucson...................................... 9, 19, 23, 25, *28, *30, 32, 40
Yuma........................................ 11, 16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARKANSAS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkadelphia................................. *13
Camden...................................... 49
El Dorado................................... *10, 27, 43
Eureka Springs.............................. 34
Fayetteville................................ *9, 15
Fort Smith.................................. 18, 21, 27
Harrison.................................... 31
Hot Springs................................. 26
Jonesboro................................... 8, *20, 48
Little Rock................................. *7, 12, 22, 30, 32, *36, 44
Mountain View............................... *13
Pine Bluff.................................. 24, 39
Rogers...................................... 50
Springdale.................................. 39
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALIFORNIA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anaheim..................................... 32
Arcata...................................... 22
Avalon...................................... 47
Bakersfield................................. 10, 25, 33, 45
Barstow..................................... 44
Bishop...................................... 20
Calipatria.................................. 36
Ceres....................................... *15
Chico....................................... 24, 43
Clovis...................................... 43
Concord..................................... 14
Corona...................................... 39
Cotati...................................... *23
El Centro................................... 9, 22
Eureka...................................... 3, *11, 17, 28
Fort Bragg.................................. 8
Fresno...................................... 7, 30, 34, 38, *40
Hanford..................................... 20
Huntington Beach............................ *48
Long Beach.................................. 18
Los Angeles................................. 7, 9, 11, 13, *28, 31, 34, 36, *41, 42, 43
Merced...................................... 11
Modesto..................................... 18
Monterey.................................... 31, 32
Novato...................................... 47
Oakland..................................... 44
Ontario..................................... 29
Oxnard...................................... 24
Palm Springs................................ 42, 46
Paradise.................................... 20
Porterville................................. 48
Rancho Palos Verdes......................... 51
Redding..................................... 7, *9
Riverside................................... 45
Sacramento.................................. *9, 10, 21, 35, 40, 48
Salinas..................................... 8, 13
San Bernardino.............................. *26, 38
San Diego................................... 8, 10, 18, 19, *30, 40
San Francisco............................... 7, 19, 27, 29, *30, *33, 38, 39, 45, 51
San Jose.................................... 12, 36, 41, 49, *50
San Luis Obispo............................. 15, 34
San Mateo................................... *43
Sanger...................................... 36
Santa Ana................................... 23
Santa Barbara............................... 21, 27
Santa Maria................................. 19
Santa Rosa.................................. 32
Stockton.................................... 25, 26, 46
Twentynine Palms............................ 23
Vallejo..................................... 34
Ventura..................................... 49
Visalia..................................... 28, *50
Watsonville................................. *25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54736]]
COLORADO
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boulder..................................... 15
Broomfield.................................. *13
Castle Rock................................. 46
Colorado Springs............................ 10, 22, 24
Denver...................................... 7, 9, *18, 19, 32, 34, 35, *40, 43, 51
Durango..................................... 15, *20, 33
Fort Collins................................ 21
Glenwood Springs............................ 23
Grand Junction.............................. 2, 7, 12, 15, *18
Longmont.................................... 29
Montrose.................................... 13
Pueblo...................................... *8, 42
Steamboat Springs........................... 10
Sterling.................................... 23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONNECTICUT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridgeport.................................. 42, *49
Hartford.................................... 31, 33, *45, 46
New Britain................................. 35
New Haven................................... *6, 10, 39
New London.................................. 26
Norwich..................................... *9
Waterbury................................... 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DELAWARE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seaford..................................... *44
Wilmington.................................. *12, 31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington.................................. 7, 9, *27, *33, 35, 36, 48, 50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLORIDA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boca Raton.................................. *40
Bradenton................................... 42
Cape Coral.................................. 35
Clearwater.................................. 21
Clermont.................................... 17
Cocoa....................................... *30, 51
Daytona Beach............................... 11, 49
Destin...................................... 48
Fort Lauderdale............................. 30
Fort Myers.................................. 9, 15, *31
Fort Pierce................................. 34, *38
Fort Walton Beach........................... 40, 49, 50
Gainesville................................. 9, 16, *36
High Springs................................ 28
Hollywood................................... 47
Jacksonville................................ *7, 13, 19, 32, 34, 42, *44
Key West.................................... 3, 8
Lake Worth.................................. 36
Lakeland.................................... 19
Leesburg.................................... 40, *46
Live Oak.................................... 48
Marianna.................................... 51
Melbourne................................... 43, 48
Miami....................................... 7, 10, *18, 19, *20, 22, 23, 31, 32, 35, 46
Naples...................................... 41, 45
New Smyrna Beach............................ *33
Ocala....................................... 31
Orange Park................................. 10
Orlando..................................... 22, *23, 26, 27, 39, 41
Palm Beach.................................. 49
Panama City................................. 7, 9, 13, *38
Panama City Beach........................... 47
Pensacola................................... 17, *31, 34, 45
Sarasota.................................... 24
St. Petersburg..........